CLIMATE CHANGE AND CROP WATER CLIMATE CHANGE AND CROP WATER PRODUCTIVITY - IMPACT AND PRODUCTIVITY - IMPACT AND

MITIGATIONMITIGATION

CREDIT SEMINAR AGROMET 591CREDIT SEMINAR AGROMET 591

PRESENTED BYPRESENTED BY DEBJYOTI MAJUMDERDEBJYOTI MAJUMDER L-2013-A-15-ML-2013-A-15-M SCHOOL OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND AGRICULTURAL SCHOOL OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND AGRICULTURAL METEOROLOGYMETEOROLOGY

WHAT IS CLIMATE CHANGEWHAT IS CLIMATE CHANGE

Climate is the average weather at a given point and Climate is the average weather at a given point and time of year, over a long period (typically 30 years).time of year, over a long period (typically 30 years).

We expect the weather to change a lot from day to We expect the weather to change a lot from day to day, but we expect the climate to remain relatively day, but we expect the climate to remain relatively constant.constant.

If the climate doesn’t remain constant, we call it If the climate doesn’t remain constant, we call it climate change.climate change.

The key question is what is a significant change – The key question is what is a significant change – and this depends upon the underlying level of and this depends upon the underlying level of climate variabilityclimate variability

Crucial to understand difference between climate Crucial to understand difference between climate change and climate variabilitychange and climate variability

Earth’s climate system – Greenhouse EffectEarth’s climate system – Greenhouse Effect

Could the warming be natural?Could the warming be natural?

Relative increase in Green House Gases Relative increase in Green House Gases influenced by anthropogenic activitiesinfluenced by anthropogenic activities

Gases CO2 CH4 N2O CFC’s

Pre-industrial atmospheric

concentration

280 ppmv 0.70 ppmv 280 ppbv 0

Current concentration

400 ppmv 1.89 ppmv 3.26 ppbv 5.03 pptv

Annual increase (%)

0.5 %(1.5 - 1.8 ppmv)

0.8 % (0.013 ppmv)

0.25 %(0.75 ppbv)

4 %(18 -20 pptv)

Global warming potential

relative to CO2

1 24.5 320 4000

Trends significant at the 5% level indicated with a ‘+’. Grey: insufficient data

Observed surface temperature trendObserved surface temperature trend

Maximum Temperature Minimum Temperature

Annual maximum and minimum temperature at Annual maximum and minimum temperature at Ludhiana Ludhiana

Jalota and Kaur (2013)Jalota and Kaur (2013)

Sea-level from satellites: 4 cm rise in 10 yearsSea-level from satellites: 4 cm rise in 10 years

Recent vagaRies /incidencesRecent vagaRies /incidences

DROUGHT HITS DROUGHT HITS KARNATAKAKARNATAKA

20082008

COLD WAVE IN COLD WAVE IN NORTHNORTH

20062006

HEAT WAVE IN HEAT WAVE IN NORTHERN INDIANORTHERN INDIA

20072007

NILAM CYCLONE 2012 Uttarakhand flood 2013 Hud Hud 2014

C3 plants

C4 plants

StephenStephen et al et al (2006) (2006)

Current CO2 levels

2 x CO2

Impact Of COImpact Of CO22 on Agricultural Productivity on Agricultural Productivity

TreatmentTreatment Grain yield (g/ Grain yield (g/ mm22))

Filled grains Filled grains (%)(%)

Individual grain Individual grain weight (mg)weight (mg)

Elevated COElevated CO22

(570 ppm)(570 ppm)

971 (24)*971 (24)* 82.9 (9)82.9 (9) 24.9 (2)24.9 (2)

Ambient COAmbient CO22

(370 ppm)(370 ppm)

783783 76.0 76.0 24.5 24.5

OpenOpen 723723 72.072.0 24.024.0

CD (p= 0.05) CD (p= 0.05) 9595 4.24.2 1.31.3

* percentage increase over ambient* percentage increase over ambient Costa et al (2006)

Effect of COEffect of CO22 concentrations on rice concentrations on rice

Effect of temperature change on growth and Effect of temperature change on growth and yield of Riceyield of Rice

Hundal and Kaur (2007)Hundal and Kaur (2007)

TemperatureTemperatureCOCO2 2 (ppm)(ppm)

Normal ( 330 ) Normal ( 330 ) 400400 500500 600600

Deviation from normal ( % )Deviation from normal ( % )

NormalNormal 7563*7563* +1.5+1.5 +6.6+6.6 +8.7+8.7

+ 0.5+ 0.500CC -3.7-3.7 -1.1-1.1 +2.2+2.2 +5.1+5.1

+ 1.0+ 1.000CC -6.6-6.6 -4.3-4.3 -2.8-2.8 +0.5+0.5

+ 1.5+ 1.500CC -8.8-8.8 -8.4-8.4 -6.1-6.1 -3.5-3.5

+ 2.0+ 2.000CC -7.5-7.5 -7.2-7.2 -4.4-4.4 -2.8-2.8

Effect of CO2 and temperature on Grain yield (kg/ha) of Rice

* grain yield at normal CO* grain yield at normal CO2 2 and temperatureand temperature

Hundal and KaurHundal and Kaur (2007)(2007)

Year Rise in temp (°C)

Productivity (Kg/ha)

Deviation in productivity

from 2005 (%)

Grain yield Grain yield

2005 0 2406 -

2020 0.6 2489 3.45

2050 1.6 2407 0.04

2080 2.6 2214 -7.98

2100 3.2 1972 -18.04

Effect of doubling COEffect of doubling CO2 2 concentration (682 ppm) and concentration (682 ppm) and

rise in mean temperature on productivity of Maize rise in mean temperature on productivity of Maize

Sharma et al (2013)

Atmospheric CO2 conc.

(ppm)

Rise in Temperature (OC)

Nil (current)

1 2 3 4 5

369 (current)0.0 -6.27 -17.09 -28.10 -42.55 -60.55

400 (2020)3.40 -3.16 -14.57 -25.54 -58.63 -58.63

550 (2050)18.65 11.12 -1.25 -13.72 -30.25 -49.94

Singh and Lal (2009)Singh and Lal (2009)

Impact of climate change on tuber yield Impact of climate change on tuber yield productivity productivity

Of all the water on Earth, only a small amount is Of all the water on Earth, only a small amount is available for us to use. It's true!available for us to use. It's true!

96.5% of the Earth's water supply is salt water.96.5% of the Earth's water supply is salt water.

Only 2.8% is fresh water!Only 2.8% is fresh water!

That 2.8% is divided like this:That 2.8% is divided like this:

0.76% is groundwater (we can use some of this water) 0.76% is groundwater (we can use some of this water)

0.0132% is in lakes and streams (we can use some of 0.0132% is in lakes and streams (we can use some of this water) this water)

1.74% is in glaciers and icecaps 1.74% is in glaciers and icecaps

0.001% is water vapor 0.001% is water vapor

Amount of fresh wAter in the Amount of fresh wAter in the world …world …

Rainfall Partitioning - Field ScaleRainfall Partitioning - Field Scale

Figures adapted from Hatibu & Rockström (2005)Figures adapted from Hatibu & Rockström (2005)

Rainfall Rainfall ((100%100%))

OCEANOCEAN

Crops (Crops (10-10-30%30%))

EvaporationEvaporation((30-50%30-50%))Weeds (Weeds (10-20%10-20%))

StorageStorage

Deep PercolationDeep Percolation

((5-10%5-10%))

Runoff (Runoff (10-30%

10-30%))

Concepts of Crop Water Use Efficiency (WUE)Concepts of Crop Water Use Efficiency (WUE)

Crop Economic WUE Crop Economic WUE = = Gross return / Evapotranspiration (mm) )

Crop WUECrop WUE= = Yield kg / Evapotranspiration (mm)

Irrigation Water Use Efficiency (WUE)Irrigation Water Use Efficiency (WUE)

Irrigation WUE Irrigation WUE = = Yield kg/ Irrigation water applied (ML)

Gross Production Economic WUE Gross Production Economic WUE = = Gross return $ / Total

water applied (ML)

Irrigation Economic WUEIrrigation Economic WUE= = Gross return $ / Irrigation water

delivered to the field (ML)

Goyal, 2004Goyal, 2004

Effect of Meterological Parameters on potential Effect of Meterological Parameters on potential evapotranspirationevapotranspiration

Factors affecting Reference Factors affecting Reference EvapotranspirationEvapotranspiration

Singh, 2010Singh, 2010

Variablity in Reference Crop Variablity in Reference Crop Evapotranpiration ETEvapotranpiration ET00

Wang Wang et al, 2012et al, 2012

Relation between PET of wheat and Weather parametersRelation between PET of wheat and Weather parameters Relation between PET of wheat and Weather parametersRelation between PET of wheat and Weather parametersParameter Regression EquationRegression Equation R2

Rainfall amount (RF) Y = -0.493 x + 543.9 0.58

No. of rainy days (NoRD) Y = -6.619 x + 564.1 0.55

Maximum temperature (Tmax)

Y = 45.34 x - 531.6 0.79

RF, NoRD, Tmax Y = -228.02 + 33.21 X1 – 0.078 X2 – 2.01 X3

Where,X1 = Mean monthly maximum temperature (November - March)X2 = Total Rainfall (November - March)X3 = Total number of rainy days (November - March)

0.83

Kingra and Kukal, 2013 Kingra and Kukal, 2013

Kingra and Kukal, 2013 Kingra and Kukal, 2013

Variabilty in Water Use Efficiency of wheat in central Punjab

Land Configuration

Anti-transpirants

Date of Sowing

Tillage

Mulching

Method of Irrigation

Planting Pattern

Irrigation Scheduling

MULCHESMULCHES Surface mulching either by timely intercultivation or by

covering the soil surface with plant residues benefits

the crops in the following ways :

• Reduce water evaporation from soil.

• Reduces water runoffs from the cropped

fields.

• Help control weeds.

• Adds organic matter to the soil and

improves soil quality.

Mulch and tillage effects on oxygen Mulch and tillage effects on oxygen diffusion rate (ODR) (×10 diffusion rate (ODR) (×10 −8−8 g cm g cm −2−2 s s −1 −1 ))

Kahlon et al, 2013Kahlon et al, 2013NT- No tillage, RT- Ridge tillage PT- Plough tillageNT- No tillage, RT- Ridge tillage PT- Plough tillage

Silty loamSilty loam

EEss TT ETET

Mulch8 Mg ha-1

100 240 340

No Mulch 135 210 345

LSD (0.05) 10 26 NS

Mulch No mulch

LSD (0.05)

Grain transpiration

efficiencyKg mm -1 ha -1

14.6 16.4 1.2

Total biomass

transpiration efficiency

Kg mm -1 ha -1

36.6 41.4 3.1

Effects of Mulching on the Effects of Mulching on the partitioning of ET in wheatpartitioning of ET in wheat

Effects of Mulching on Effects of Mulching on transpiration efficiency in wheattranspiration efficiency in wheat

Singh Singh et alet al , 2011 , 2011

Clay loam

Water Use efficiency of wheat under different tillage and mulch

CTCT BPBP

FactorsFactors MM00 MM11 MM00 MM11

Moisture Moisture depletion (cm)depletion (cm) 19.0219.02 15.1215.12 18.6318.63 15.1115.11

Water Use (cm)Water Use (cm) 26.0526.05 22.1522.15 24.3724.37 22.1822.18

Yield (kg haYield (kg ha-1-1)) 32963296 36133613 32063206 37823782

WUE WUE (kg ha(kg ha-1-1cmcm-1-1)) 126.5126.5 163.2163.2 131.6131.6 170.5170.5

Meena Meena et alet al, 2011, 2011CT – Conventional tillage, BP – Bed PlantingCT – Conventional tillage, BP – Bed Planting

Response of straw mulch on crop yield and irrigation water saving

Crop Yield increase(kg ha-1)

Irrigation water saving (cm)

Maize fodder 7500 15

Sorghum fodder 7200 23

Mentha 700 32

Sugarcane 4300 40

Potato 3900 12

Moong 100 7

Jalota Jalota et al, et al, 20072007

Clay soilClay soil Meena Meena et alet al , 2011, 2011

EffEct of Straw mulch on thE root lEngth EffEct of Straw mulch on thE root lEngth dEnSity of whEatdEnSity of whEat

PROMOTION OF PRECISION LAND LEVELLINGPROMOTION OF PRECISION LAND LEVELLING

131225900

116150

280172

608165

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000300000

350000

400000

450000

500000

550000

600000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Years

Are

a C

overe

d (

ha)

Area Covered during 2009: 3.28 lac hectares

Effects of land configuration on IW (cm) and WUE ( kg ha -1 cm-1)

Sidhu Sidhu et alet al, 2005, 2005Loamy sand, pH- 8.3Loamy sand, pH- 8.3

R - Ridge, BB- Broad bed, NB - Narrow bedR - Ridge, BB- Broad bed, NB - Narrow bed

Influence of irrigation, tillage, and mulching on Influence of irrigation, tillage, and mulching on WP (kg haWP (kg ha-1-1 mm mm-1-1) of soybean in the two soils ) of soybean in the two soils

Arora Arora et alet al, , 20112011

Loamy sandLoamy sand Sandy loamSandy loam

TillageTillage MulchMulch 6 t ha6 t ha-1-1

IIpp IIff IIpp IIff

CTCT

M0M0 1.391.39 1.871.87 3.163.16 2.782.78

MM 1.671.67 2.262.26 3.893.89 3.303.30

DTDTM0M0 1.661.66 2.252.25 3.553.55 2.822.82

MM 1.971.97 2.332.33 3.783.78 3.283.28

CT –Conventional tillage, DT -Deep CT –Conventional tillage, DT -Deep tillagetillageII pp - Partial irrigation, I- Partial irrigation, I ff -Full irrigation -Full irrigation

Method Of crop Establishment

Grain Yield (kg/ha)

Total ET (mm)

WUE (kg/m-3 )

Net Productivity

of used water (Rs m-3

)

Early sowing with minimum tillage

Late sowing with minimum Tillage

1290

1060

241.3

182.8

0.60

0.58

4.85

4.30

Paira cropping without Tillage 750 188.6 0.40 2.93

CD(P=0.05) 130 21.4 0.06 0.37

Grain Yield, Evapotranspiration,WUE and Net Water Productivity in Horsegram Under different Tillage Practices

Singh Singh et alet al, 2008, 2008

Indicative World’s Irrigation Water EfficiencyIndicative World’s Irrigation Water Efficiency

15%

25%

15%

45%

Distribution LossesApplication LossesConveyance LossesCrop Use

Serageldin (1997)Serageldin (1997)

Irrigation Efficiencies under Different Irrigation Efficiencies under Different MethodsMethods

Irrigation EfficienciesIrrigation Efficiencies Method of Irrigation (%)Method of Irrigation (%)

Surface Surface Sprinkler Sprinkler DripDrip

Conveyance EfficiencyConveyance Efficiency 40-50 (canal)40-50 (canal)60-70 (well) 60-70 (well) -- --

Application EfficiencyApplication Efficiency 60-70 60-70 70-80 70-80 9090

Surface water moisture Surface water moisture evaporation evaporation

30-40 30-40 30-4030-40 20-2520-25

Overall efficiencyOverall efficiency 30-3530-35 50-6050-60 80-9080-90

Impact of Irrigation method On Water use Efficiency Impact of Irrigation method On Water use Efficiency in Cottonin Cotton

Ibragimov Ibragimov et al et al (2007)(2007)

CHANGE IN CROP CALENDERCHANGE IN CROP CALENDERD

EP

LE

TIO

N I

N W

AT

ER

LE

VE

L

DE

PL

ET

ION

IN

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

(C

M)

(CM

)

Recommended Date of Paddy Transplantation

If paddy is transplanted after 15th June, then net recharge and net draft If paddy is transplanted after 15th June, then net recharge and net draft balance each other in case rainfall is normal balance each other in case rainfall is normal

Grain yield and water productivity of wheat as Grain yield and water productivity of wheat as influence by planting patterninfluence by planting pattern

Planting Planting patternpattern

Seed rate Seed rate (kg ha(kg ha-1-1))

No. of No. of spikes/mspikes/m33

Grain Grain yieldyield

(t ha(t ha-1-1))

Water Water productivitproductivity (kg grainy (kg grain

mm-3 -3 ))

Bed 90 cmBed 90 cm 8080 445445 6.186.18 2.252.25

Flat bedFlat bed 100100 426426 5.285.28 1.261.26

CD (0.05)CD (0.05) 19.8419.84 0.3430.343 0.110.11

Silty loamSilty loamSilty loamSilty loam Kumar Kumar et alet al, 2010, 2010Kumar Kumar et alet al, 2010, 2010

Planting Patterns

Cane Yield (t/ha)

Water Applied

(cm)

WUE(kgm3

)

Paired row Planting Paired row Planting (0.75m)(0.75m)

158.8158.8 91.491.4 17.3717.37

Four row Planting Four row Planting (0.90m)(0.90m)

161.4161.4 106.4106.4 15.1615.16

Normal Planting Normal Planting (1.0m)(1.0m)

136.8136.8193.0193.0 7.087.08

Effect of Planting Pattern on yield and WUE Effect of Planting Pattern on yield and WUE Of Sugarcane in Rahuri, MaharashtraOf Sugarcane in Rahuri, Maharashtra

Yadav Yadav et alet al, 2000, 2000

Anti-transpirantsAnti-transpirants

AntitranspirantsAntitranspirants is any material applied to transpiring plant surface for reducing water losses from plant.

Nearly 99% of water absorbed by the plant is lost in transpiration Stomatal closing type – Phenyl mercuric acetate and Atrazine Film forming type – Plastic and waxy materials (Mobileaf,

Hexadeconol, Silicon) form a thin film on the leaf surface Reflectant type – White material form a coating on the leaves

and increase the leaf reflectance (5% Kaolin spray) Growth retardant – Chemicals reduce shoot growth and increase

root growth and thus enable the plant to resist drought (Cycocel). They may also induce stomatal closure.

TreatmentsTreatments Mean transpirationMean transpiration Dry Matter Dry Matter productionproduction

WUEWUE

Soil Moisture Soil Moisture RegimesRegimes

gm/potgm/pot gm/potgm/pot gm /gm gm /gm ×104×104

LowLow 20842084 8.58.5 40.840.8

HighHigh 27602760 9.49.4 34.034.0

Anti-transpirantAnti-transpirant

ControlControl 32343234 8.78.7 8.78.7

PMAPMA 21922192 8.18.1 8.18.1

KaoliniteKaolinite 25982598 8.88.8 8.88.8

PMA + KaolinitePMA + Kaolinite 18181818 9.29.2 9.29.2

MobileafMobileaf 22722272 10.010.0 10.010.0

Patil and De, 2006Patil and De, 2006

Influence of Anti-transpirants On Water Productivity Influence of Anti-transpirants On Water Productivity of Rapeseed (of Rapeseed (Brassica campestrisBrassica campestris L.) L.)

CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS

• With the increase in temperature, the PET demand will be increased With the increase in temperature, the PET demand will be increased

so as the crop water requirement.so as the crop water requirement.

• Increase in evapo-transpiration due to global warming can put Increase in evapo-transpiration due to global warming can put tremendous pressure on existing over-stressed water resources. tremendous pressure on existing over-stressed water resources.

• More emphasis is needed to develop technologies for reducing water More emphasis is needed to develop technologies for reducing water losses, conservation of rain water and development of crop varieties losses, conservation of rain water and development of crop varieties requiring less water.requiring less water.

• Different management strategies such as proper irrigation methods Different management strategies such as proper irrigation methods and scheduling, use anti-transpirants and proper management of and scheduling, use anti-transpirants and proper management of cultural practices enhance the yield and decreases ET losses.cultural practices enhance the yield and decreases ET losses.

• Integrated research efforts involving agrometeorologists,, Integrated research efforts involving agrometeorologists,, agronomists, soil water engineers and plant breeders are required to agronomists, soil water engineers and plant breeders are required to manage the water resources and crop water productivity under manage the water resources and crop water productivity under changing climatic conditionschanging climatic conditions. .

.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR THANK YOU FOR YOUR KIND KIND

ATTENTION !!!ATTENTION !!!